|
Sue Denim posted:Why does everyone dislike the Rock's sharp shooter? I love it personally, is it because he doesn't pull back to make it look like a painful stretch like Bret? He connects at the ankles. The move is supposed to connect ankle under knee; his connects ankle to ankle. It's the sloppiest, easiest way to throw it on. It's part of the reason he can't really sit back with it and lean on it. The form is just all off from the actual structure of how the move was done previously, by anyone, not just Bret. Just looks lazy when he does it, I guess. A really easy comparison is watching Rock/Ausfin at WM17: Austin throws it on more like Owen than Bret, using the kneepad for additional leverage. Just looks more effective that way, to me. Of course, this is sperging about fake holds in fake fighting, so it doesn't really matter either way, in the end. El Duke Silver fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Feb 27, 2011 |
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 11:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
Also it makes sense that it looks weak because he never won with it 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 12:18
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Also it makes sense that it looks weak because he never won with it He won his first World Title with it
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 12:21
|
|
|
How do the ladder matches of other feds compare to WWE's? Because I tend to think of that match-type as their specialty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 12:29
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Also it makes sense that it looks weak because he never won with it Actually, I distinctly remember Regal tapping out to it before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 12:46
|
|
|
Has Konnan ever had a good match? I'm up to Spring 1999 on Nitro's and haven't seen one yet. His dire catchphrases and poo poo rap videos have also created maskless GANGSTA Rey Mysterio who is now 5000% more annoying. I knew about the logo to Nitro changing in 1999 but I didn't know about DJ RAN, the hilarious drum n bass theme song (cutting to a confused looking Heenan) and nobody in the main event scene knowing if they're heel or face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 13:21
|
|
|
Giedroyc posted:Has Konnan ever had a good match? I'm up to Spring 1999 on Nitro's and haven't seen one yet. His dire catchphrases and poo poo rap videos have also created maskless GANGSTA Rey Mysterio who is now 5000% more annoying. He had some fairly good matches in 96 and 97, but that was mostly because he was working with the various cruiserweights. Eddie, Jericho, Rey Mysterio jr, Juventud, Liger etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 13:49
|
|
|
I've often seen Konnan called the "Mexican Hogan." And yeah, his matches sucked a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 14:25
|
|
|
Rodney the Piper posted:his matches sucked a lot. So he's the Mexican Hogan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 15:04
|
|
|
Kerck Pnameless posted:How do the ladder matches of other feds compare to WWE's? Because I tend to think of that match-type as their specialty. Well, the ladder match originated in Stampede. They were different because they were structured more around the drama of the climb than the ridiculous spot. The first few WWE ladder matches are more in that tradition, but then the Hardys and Edge and Christian changed them to massive car wrecks. That said, WCW had a really good one with the Jung Dragons and 3 Count at the last Starrcade I believe. It was a crazy spotfest in the Hardys-Edge and Christian-Dudleys tradition. That's the only non-WWE one that jumps out at me without looking all the way back to Stampede. I've seen a couple from local Indies that were varying shades of awful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 16:28
|
|
|
Would it actually be possible for a wrestling company to genuinely compete with WWE at a national / international level these days? If so, if this isn't too nerdy a fantasy booking question, what would a company have to do to compete? Secondary question to that: which smaller wrestling feds actually make money? Does ROH turn a profit, do they break even, or are they pulling a long slow ECW ebb?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
anakha posted:Actually, I distinctly remember Regal tapping out to it before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 17:24
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:Would it actually be possible for a wrestling company to genuinely compete with WWE at a national / international level these days? If so, if this isn't too nerdy a fantasy booking question, what would a company have to do to compete? Basically no. Or a qualified no at least. I would say that in order to compete with the WWE they would need to get a TV deal (without a TV deal the best matches from the most talented performers will still only have an audience in the thousands including the live crowd and DVD sales online or whatever) and then have one or more breakout stars who cross into the the mainstream at around about the same time as wrestling has another boom. And they'll have to have got there without relying on washed up ex-WWE guys to carry the uppercard (because that'll make them look B-league) and without the E luring their promising talent away with deals that they simply cant compete with. I'd argue that having a training school run by talented veterans would pretty much be a necessity to produce their own wrestlers so they arent simply recycling former WWE guys and the same indy stars that you could see on TNA/ROH. So they would need; Money. A loyal fanbase who attend shows regularly. A TV deal. Money. A wrestling talent pool that wont be lured away by the WWE chequebook the second they get any national attention. Serious amounts of money without anyone looking for a quick return. You would need to be american. As much as its an international business, I just dont see the US going nuts for a foreign wrestling organisation, even if they speak english. I guess theoretically a british organisation could make it big in the UK, parlay that into european success then take america with that behind them as "Europes #1 wrestling organisation!" but I'd be suprised. A white-hot angle to draw people in. I guess it boils down to money, talent and luck. I guess it could happen on a modest budget, or it could happen with only a modicum of talent, but you'd need 2 out the 3, and one of them would have to be a metric shittonne of luck. Or for the WWE to suffer some sort of catastrophe that has a huge impact, but it would have to be huge. The steriod thing didnt kill them, the Benoit thing didnt kill them, linda failing at politics didnt kill them, I dont know what it would take to be honest. The thing is, if any mid-sized organisation looked like it might grow to be a threat to the WWE, they have the resources to either buy the organisation outright, or simply gut it by offering key wrestlers big money contracts. Thats how Vince dealt with legitimate competition when he was expanding in the first place, I dont see him having a problem doing it again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
TL posted:That said, WCW had a really good one with the Jung Dragons and 3 Count at the last Starrcade I believe. It was a crazy spotfest in the Hardys-Edge and Christian-Dudleys tradition. That's the only non-WWE one that jumps out at me without looking all the way back to Stampede. Is that the one from New Blood Rising? If so, I remember that the guys in the match certainly worked hard and did some cool spots, but there's just so much stupidity. I don't remember exactly, I think there were two things hanging above the ring- the Dragons had to win by pulling down 3 Count's recording contract and 3 Count had to win by pulling a gold record down. Of course, the Dragons get up there and grab the record, accomplishing nothing and looking like complete idiots (either the goal wasn't clearly explained to them, or they really were booked to look like idiots, in WCW either sounds totally possible). Then Tank Abbott bullshit. I just felt really bad for everyone in that match. My local indie promotion did a rip off of Money in the Bank last show I went to. It was surprisingly decent with a couple of really cool spots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
I first got into wrestling in 2000-01, came back for a coupla years mid-decade and then returned a couple of weeks ago (just in time for the Rock!). So I've been catching up with all the PPVs I missed from 2002, currently at Wrestlemania XX, and I have questions. Has anyone else noticed the irony of a drug-addict being derided by Kurt Angle? (Sidebar: It's such a shame we missed out on a Eddie/CM Punk feud) When did Scotty 2 Hotty leave the company? I thought he'd been gone for ages and then he suddenly turned up with Rikishi as tag champs. What are the best 'Manias from the last decade? XX seemed really good to me but I don't have much to compare it to. Lastly, what was the internet reaction to WWE in 2000 like? I didn't really get into that until Triple H's heel turn late in the year, I'd like to know what people thought of things like The Rock/HHH feud, Jericho's title that never was, the love triangle and such.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
What did WWE do with all the massive PPV setpieces they used from like 1998 through 2006? I like to think they've got a storehouse somewhere full of fake cars, helicopters, and the spaceship John Cena had at that Royal Rumble.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Kerck Pnameless posted:How do the ladder matches of other feds compare to WWE's? Because I tend to think of that match-type as their specialty. ROH only had two ladder matches, both of which were unbelievably awesome and brutal. They pretty much protect that match as a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:19
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:Would it actually be possible for a wrestling company to genuinely compete with WWE at a national / international level these days? If so, if this isn't too nerdy a fantasy booking question, what would a company have to do to compete? Someone could compete if they had the money to spend and good booking sense to do an MMA-ish league with logical, realistic feuds over titles and grudges. If a really well produced wrestling company had Danielson, Punk, Joe, Nigel, Davey Richards, and guys like that, and booked them as stars, it'd be huge. Basically, book like UFC (which books like pro wrestling when pro wrestling was making tons of money) but take advantage of the fact that you can make your own stars with predetermined wins and can run shows with top guys way more often than UFC. quote:Secondary question to that: which smaller wrestling feds actually make money? Does ROH turn a profit, do they break even, or are they pulling a long slow ECW ebb? I think ROH is doing alright. Nobody's getting rich, but I think they are a comfortable small business.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:Basically no. Or a qualified no at least. I would say that in order to compete with the WWE they would need to get a TV deal (without a TV deal the best matches from the most talented performers will still only have an audience in the thousands including the live crowd and DVD sales online or whatever) and then have one or more breakout stars who cross into the the mainstream at around about the same time as wrestling has another boom. And they'll have to have got there without relying on washed up ex-WWE guys to carry the uppercard (because that'll make them look B-league) and without the E luring their promising talent away with deals that they simply cant compete with. I'd argue that having a training school run by talented veterans would pretty much be a necessity to produce their own wrestlers so they arent simply recycling former WWE guys and the same indy stars that you could see on TNA/ROH. The maddening thing is that TNA technically has most of the tools. They have a decent money mark who doesn't seem too bothered about making a big profit quickly, they have a good amount of non-WWE made talent, and they have TV and a loyal audience. Then they gently caress it up with their inferiority complex and Vince Russo having pictures of Dixie making out with a goat to use as blackmail for a job. (The idea of her actually thinking he's good is more terrifying)
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:34
|
|
|
Satire Forum Mom posted:Someone could compete if they had the money to spend and good booking sense to do an MMA-ish league with logical, realistic feuds over titles and grudges. If a really well produced wrestling company had Danielson, Punk, Joe, Nigel, Davey Richards, and guys like that, and booked them as stars, it'd be huge. Basically, book like UFC (which books like pro wrestling when pro wrestling was making tons of money) but take advantage of the fact that you can make your own stars with predetermined wins and can run shows with top guys way more often than UFC. I'm not really sure what the advantage would be in being MMA-ish when people can just watch MMA instead. I don't think a fake sport can really go head-to-head with a "real" one just on athleticism alone- I think you need the dramatics to some extent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I'm not really sure what the advantage would be in being MMA-ish when people can just watch MMA instead. I don't think a fake sport can really go head-to-head with a "real" one just on athleticism alone- I think you need the dramatics to some extent. Thing is, MMA feuds are built a lot like pro-wrestling ones used to be. You have a babyface and a heel, you have a clash of personalities leading to them wanting to fight, you have them trash-talk for a bit, then you make the audience pay to see who wins. All that suggestion is asking for, is for wrestling to be booked like wrestling and stop trying to be SNL (with some matches).
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:Would it actually be possible for a wrestling company to genuinely compete with WWE at a national / international level these days? If so, if this isn't too nerdy a fantasy booking question, what would a company have to do to compete? Lamuella posted:Pretty much all of this. A TV deal would be a must, one of the reasons WCW became as successful as it did was because Ted Turner believed in wrestling as a profitable television product - it had been a part of TBS broadcasting since TBS was founded. However, one of WCW's biggest problems on TV was that once Turner came to own it instead of just broadcasting it the company also had Turner marketing people to deal with and most of them had no idea how to market wrestling, they thought you could just throw anything in the ring and people would watch it. I distinctly remembering Kip Frey saying at some point that he was trying to work a product placement deal with Hormel Foods for a wrestler called Spam Man. It's pretty sad considering that Turner made wrestling into a pretty good product on his network even before Monday nights and he did it using one of the worst time slots for the ideal wrestling demographic - Saturday afternoon for 18 to 34 males. The biggest roadblock to a TV deal these days are the networks themselves, there will always be an inherent bias against pro wrestling in the United States by broadcasters despite the mostly-unwatchable crap they show now. Concept Development. A company would have to come up with specialty matches and event themes that they actually invested time in to flesh out and develop. It would be helpful these days because the WWE seems to be getting away from the specialty events it spent years to create - when I was younger one of my favorite events was Survivor Series in either the 5v5 or 4v4 format and I always looked forward to the Survivor Series Showdown the night before where each team sent one wrestler to face a guy from the opposing team; I totally marked out for Ted DiBiase versus Smash way back then. I loved the idea of BattleBowl when it first started because it was promoted as random tag team matchups, but towards the end of the BattleBowl era you rarely saw any tag team combination you couldn't see just by watching WCW Saturday Night and that was aside from matches where tag team partners were paired up with each other. Don't copy WWE. TNA would make greater strides in the business if they separated themselves from "Sports Entertainment" and went back to wrestling with an athletic emphasis and a reduction in storyline prominence. WCW grew when it decided to do the opposite of what WWE was doing. In-House Talent. Any company would need to keep a rein on its talent and I think most of this could be done with simple contracts, if I recall back during the Monday Night Wars nearly every time an ECW wrestler breached his contract it was to jump to WCW and the reason for that was they just threw huge amounts of money at him - the highest paid salary for an ECW wrestler was $78,000 a year while the average signing bonus for an ECW wrestler going into WCW was $250,000 - if you can make over 3 times your annual pay in a signing bonus alone its an offer that is hard to turn down. One advantage for a smaller company here is that, to this day, Vince McMahon is adamant about not signing guaranteed contracts; he has said more than once he gives opportunities, not guarantees. Most talent these days should be smart enough to look at what options they would seriously have in the WWE if they jumped from another company, if that company is big enough that wrestler has to be particularly outstanding to make an impact in the WWE or else he'll be languishing in the midcard. I don't think Vince McMahon would outright try to buy a rival with good growth potential, he did so in the past as a matter of expansion but once that expansion was complete he was happy to let regional promotions exist (ECW, USWA, SMW) and even promoted them on some of his events. McMahon isn't dumb, all he would need to do is look at buyrates and ratings with a competitor versus what those numbers are without one. I think he's also smart enough to realize that unless a major network or some exceptionally wealthy person decided to make a serious run at wrestling, knowing full well they are going against a juggernaut and would be losing money for at least three to five years, there is really no one who can effectively compete with him. The WWE is more than a wrestling company now, it's essentially a multimedia company, and one that owns a significant portion of the history of wrestling in the United States, they have plenty of viable assets that don't involve direct promotion of wrestling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
Cruiserweights and tag teams are traditionally the area where WWE is not so good because McMahon likes big guys throwing each other around. (There are exceptions, obviously- Rey Mysterio is popular enough that he'd be stupid not to push him.) TNA sort of has stronger development in this area, but they run so few matches per show that it's impossible to tell anymore. A promotion that actually emphasized these would have some leg up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I'm not really sure what the advantage would be in being MMA-ish when people can just watch MMA instead. I don't think a fake sport can really go head-to-head with a "real" one just on athleticism alone- I think you need the dramatics to some extent. Of course you need drama. When real sports make the most money, it's because of drama. Yankees / Red Sox, Celtics / Lakers, Lesnar / Carwin . But real sports can create drama. Wrestling can, because it's all pre-determined. Have a guy that's connected with the crowd but isn't all the way there yet? Give him a ton of decisive, awesome looking wins, or have him get the poo poo kicked out of him but still keep fighting! UFC can't do that. People don't care what's real and what's not - see the popularity of fiction. They just want it presented as real. Do things that make sense that emotionally connect with the audience. Stone Cold Steve Austin was gigantic because people related to the story and believed in the character. People legitimately thought Stone Cold could kick people's asses, because he was presented that way. The talent is there to make wrestling popular again. They just need to be treated like stars. If you booked a well produced show with relatable angles, you'd take down WWE in a year. I mean, UFC did it, with all the handicaps of being a real sport.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
so could a company succeed by tapping a market WWE isn't looking at too closely? I've often wondered if a Chikara type product could thrive in the Saturday morning kid's TV market, by having a bigger budget for their story segments and them filming their matches on a set in front of a Nickelodeon type audience. Obviously, it wouldn't draw WWE ratings, but if it were played as part of a kid's TV lineup it's the sort of thing that could draw in repeat business. Also, if done in shorter seasons it could have considerable replay value.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
I think targeting the kiddie market any more directly than WWE has with the TV-PG approach would get you all sorts of criticism, and I'm not sure Nick or Cartoon Network or whoever would want the hassle. You can't really make this sport "safe", unless everyone wears padding. That said, since WWE is slowly moving away from the TV-PG stuff that might leave a void for a new company to try that approach and not seem like they're just muting themselves, and you could theoretically get programming there on weekend mornings and afternoons like in the good old days. I'm sure there's a reason wrestling companies stopped doing that, but it might be worth looking into again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
El Duke posted:He connects at the ankles. The move is supposed to connect ankle under knee; his connects ankle to ankle. It's the sloppiest, easiest way to throw it on. It's part of the reason he can't really sit back with it and lean on it. The form is just all off from the actual structure of how the move was done previously, by anyone, not just Bret. Just looks lazy when he does it, I guess. A really easy comparison is watching Rock/Ausfin at WM17: Austin throws it on more like Bret than Owen, using the kneepad for additional leverage. Just looks more effective that way, to me. Ziggy Tsardust posted:He won his first World Title with it
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 20:34
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:I swear, you have an answer for everything, Ziggy! Well, it's a half truth - The Rock won his first world title in a repeat of the Montreal Screwjob.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Has anyone else noticed the irony of a drug-addict being derided by Kurt Angle? (Sidebar: It's such a shame we missed out on a Eddie/CM Punk feud) 1. No 2. 2005. He had a ***** match with Davey Richards in the Florida indy FIP 3. 17, 24, and 19. 4. Not sure on all of it, but I know most people despised Fully Loaded 2000 with good reason (Hey let's bury Kurt Angle! Let's get Rock rightfully DQ'd in a match where if he's DQ'd, he loses the title...and have Foley reverse the decision for no reason!!) and they hated the end of the love triangle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
This is just my opinion, but I think we didn't know how good we had it back then. 2000 was a fantastic year for WWE due to the depth of talent, tag division, cohesive writing etc. There were some major criticisms, particularly around WM2000 which was turd and had a real Frankenstein main event, and the lack of push for guys like Jericho and Benoit who were ready for the main event but constantly held below Rock/HHH/Taker. Rock/HHH was a very hot feud but the dominance of the McMahon-Helmsley Regime was seen as overbearing. Rock would occasionally win at a PPV but spend four weeks getting outnumbered or outsmarted. Occasionally someone like Kane or Rikishi would run in to help and then they'd get beaten down as well. Obviously Jericho's phantom title win factored into this as well. Kurt Angle obviously stood out as having an amazing rookie year, winning numerous titles, King of the Ring and eventually the WWF title from the Rock.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
PWInsider reports that preliminary buy rates for the RR are at 449,000, which is down from last year. I wonder who will be blamed for the lower buyrate. the wwe universe
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 21:23
|
|
|
2000 has been a bit of a victim of rose colored glasses, but it is still a very good year. It has a pretty bad end (Thanks Steph), but most of the year was excellent. 2001's PPVs were much better in-ring, but 2000 was a year where everything was really banging on all cylinders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:2000 has been a bit of a victim of rose colored glasses, but it is still a very good year. It has a pretty bad end (Thanks Steph), but most of the year was excellent. 2001's PPVs were much better in-ring, but 2000 was a year where everything was really banging on all cylinders. It's fun watching late 2000/early 2001 and watching the product and trying to pinpoint the exact moment where they ran out of Chris Kreski's storyboards and had to start booking from scratch. Apart from the resolution of the HHH/Steph/Angle storyline, Steph's early run was alright. It was coherant and there was a lot of continuity. Still had some storyboards left over. But around the Two Man Power Trip vs. Hardyz feud, it all started getting really sloppy and slapdash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 21:35
|
|
|
How would a company rise up to compete with WWE? Apart from all the things mentioned, they'd also need to have an utter and unshakable commitment to probably at least a decade of slow building if not more till they had the fundamentals of their business down/established wrestlers/established fanbase and then they would have to take maddeningly small baby steps to acclimatise themselves to the growth in popularity of their company over the period of another half decade or so and THEN they might be in a position to start perhaps competing with WWE.... which would probably already have noticed them and started cherry-picking their talent by that point. Given that 95% of would be promotions seem to start on the basis of,"WWE is huge now and I assume it just started up that way, let's also be huge immediately because I am not a good businessman!"..... welp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
Ziggy Tsardust posted:It's fun watching late 2000/early 2001 and watching the product and trying to pinpoint the exact moment where they ran out of Chris Kreski's storyboards and had to start booking from scratch. Apart from the resolution of the HHH/Steph/Angle storyline, Steph's early run was alright. It was coherant and there was a lot of continuity. Still had some storyboards left over. But around the Two Man Power Trip vs. Hardyz feud, it all started getting really sloppy and slapdash. It never got outright terrible until then, but the last events from Unforgiven on in 2000 were very mediocre, and TV in early 2001 was kind of messy. The Rock-Austin buildup is looked upon fondly because of the hype video, but honestly it was kind of lovely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 22:21
|
|
|
Is Wrestlemania 2000 the only WM to have a heel win the main event? If so, are there any other major PPVs that have such a history of heels/faces overwhelmingly winning in such a landslide fashion? I would imagine Survivor Series would be more heels winning, considering that would be a good time to build up to the Wrestlemania face win.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 22:26
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:How would a company rise up to compete with WWE? Apart from all the things mentioned, they'd also need to have an utter and unshakable commitment to probably at least a decade of slow building if not more till they had the fundamentals of their business down/established wrestlers/established fanbase and then they would have to take maddeningly small baby steps to acclimatise themselves to the growth in popularity of their company over the period of another half decade or so and THEN they might be in a position to start perhaps competing with WWE.... which would probably already have noticed them and started cherry-picking their talent by that point. Honestly I don't think trying to compete directly with WWE is a viable option, at least not in the near future. TNA is their closest competitor and even they have to rely on free rent at Universal, bottomless pockets from an outside investor, a TV deal with a network that just wants to have a timeslot filled and a fanbase that's primarily watching for the trainwreck factor or because they don't care what quality the product is, as long as "it's not WWE". Once Vince hands the reins over to his successor things might be different, but right now it'd be like thinking you can stop a tidal wave by trying to build a wall with a plastic pail and shovel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 22:35
|
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Is Wrestlemania 2000 the only WM to have a heel win the main event? If so, are there any other major PPVs that have such a history of heels/faces overwhelmingly winning in such a landslide fashion? I would imagine Survivor Series would be more heels winning, considering that would be a good time to build up to the Wrestlemania face win. Technically, WM9 has the heel win the advertised main event.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:Also it makes sense that it looks weak because he never won with it Hogan tapped to it at Wrestlemania 18.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
crankdatbatman posted:Is Wrestlemania 2000 the only WM to have a heel win the main event? If so, are there any other major PPVs that have such a history of heels/faces overwhelmingly winning in such a landslide fashion? I would imagine Survivor Series would be more heels winning, considering that would be a good time to build up to the Wrestlemania face win. Austin turned heel to win the title at XVII, but the Texas crowd gave him a huge babyface reaction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2011 23:02
|
|